ClearPS
Discussions

Possible New feature for future CS release

1903 views19 repliesLast post: 10/27/2011
featurenewpossiblerelease
@Michael J Davis
2011-10-11 10:56:31
Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> was inspired to say
It seems this "Removal of blur" filter could possibly be included in a future Photoshop release.
< http://gizmodo.com/5848371/photoshop-will-end-blurry-pics-fo rever >
Certainly sounds interesting - all those 'L'-shaped camera shake blurs (made worse, incidentally, by IS technology) - would be nice to deal with.

Frankly, because it's not just the blur but the dwell time of the 'exposure' at each point on the curve, I'm sceptical even though the theory may be sound.

I've been using "Focus Magic" for some years on Photoshop Elements to correct both simple camera shake and subject movement blur, as well as oof blur, and it works beautifully!

Mike

--
Michael J Davis
<><
#2
@Savageduck
2011-10-11 19:19:12
On 2011-10-11 12:07:52 -0700, "Ulysses" said:

"Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
It seems this "Removal of blur" filter could possibly be included in a future Photoshop release.
< http://gizmodo.com/5848371/photoshop-will-end-blurry-pics-fo rever >
--
Regards,

Savageduck
smart sharpen in Photoshop seems to work OK for me
what would be the difference ?

....and that is just fine, but no amount of sharpening, smart sharpening and/or application of USM, is going to reduce the effect of motion blur. I suspect the astronomic photography world would welcome this, and some shots of crowd scenes could benefit
This concept uses a different algorithm and computer power to remove motion blur without introducing sharpening artifacts.
This is not as some would think, a solution for fixing out of focus images. Take another look at the presentation and listen to what is being said.

--
Regards,

Savageduck
#4
@Talker
2011-10-11 20:52:21
On Tue, 11 Oct 2011 12:19:12 -0700, Savageduck
<savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

On 2011-10-11 12:07:52 -0700, "Ulysses" said:
"Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
It seems this "Removal of blur" filter could possibly be included in a future Photoshop release.
< http://gizmodo.com/5848371/photoshop-will-end-blurry-pics-fo rever >
--
Regards,

Savageduck
smart sharpen in Photoshop seems to work OK for me
what would be the difference ?

...and that is just fine, but no amount of sharpening, smart sharpening and/or application of USM, is going to reduce the effect of motion blur. I suspect the astronomic photography world would welcome this, and some shots of crowd scenes could benefit
This concept uses a different algorithm and computer power to remove motion blur without introducing sharpening artifacts.
This is not as some would think, a solution for fixing out of focus images. Take another look at the presentation and listen to what is being said.

I was thinking the same thing about astrophotography. With my telescope, the slightest breeze causes motion blur. Of course, we usually stack hundreds of pictures to get a decent picture, but something like this would be very useful.....especially when using a higher power eyepiece.

Talker
#5
@Carrie
2011-10-12 13:33:57
"Ulysses" wrote in message
"Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
It seems this "Removal of blur" filter could possibly be included in a future Photoshop release.
< http://gizmodo.com/5848371/photoshop-will-end-blurry-pics-fo rever >
--
Regards,

Savageduck
smart sharpen in Photoshop seems to work OK for me
what would be the difference ?

It works for me, too. They just need more gimmicks to get people to keep buying newer versions.
I have CS3 that works for me and does everything I want and I don't see needing anything more (at least at this point)

#6
@Savageduck
2011-10-12 15:18:38
On 2011-10-12 06:33:57 -0700, "Carrie" said:

"Ulysses" wrote in message
"Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
It seems this "Removal of blur" filter could possibly be included in a future Photoshop release.
< http://gizmodo.com/5848371/photoshop-will-end-blurry-pics-fo rever >
--
Regards,

Savageduck
smart sharpen in Photoshop seems to work OK for me
what would be the difference ?

It works for me, too. They just need more gimmicks to get people to keep buying newer versions.
I have CS3 that works for me and does everything I want and I don't see needing anything more (at least at this point)

There is certainly nothing wrong with continuing to use any of the earlier versions of Photoshop if they meet your needs, and it seems CS3 is more than enough for you to deal will.

I have skipped different versions because I could not see a need to make a change. However, the additions to CS5 go far beyond "gimmick". So my upgrade path has been PS7, to CS2, to CS4, to CS5. For me content aware fill & healing, the improved selection tools, the new ACR RAW engine (which I know isn't important to you) and the new version of Bridge have been worth the price of admission.

....and when CS6 is released there will be reasons for not upgrading, and reasons for not upgrading. Some will say the changes and added "gimmicks" don't make it worthwhile, and for them they will probably be right. I might well be among those, but if there is a new feature I can be convinced is useful, I might just upgrade.
--
Regards,

Savageduck
#7
@Carrie
2011-10-12 22:25:41
"Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
On 2011-10-12 06:33:57 -0700, "Carrie" said:

"Ulysses" wrote in message
"Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
It seems this "Removal of blur" filter could possibly be included in a future Photoshop release.
< http://gizmodo.com/5848371/photoshop-will-end-blurry-pics-fo rever >
--
Regards,

Savageduck
smart sharpen in Photoshop seems to work OK for me
what would be the difference ?

It works for me, too. They just need more gimmicks to get people to keep
buying newer versions.
I have CS3 that works for me and does everything I want and I don't see
needing anything more (at least at this point)

There is certainly nothing wrong with continuing to use any of the earlier versions of Photoshop if they meet your needs, and it seems CS3 is more than enough for you to deal will.

I have skipped different versions because I could not see a need to make a change. However, the additions to CS5 go far beyond "gimmick". So my upgrade path has been PS7, to CS2, to CS4, to CS5.
For me content aware fill & healing, the improved selection tools, the new ACR RAW engine (which I know isn't important to you) and the new version of Bridge have been worth the price of admission.

...and when CS6 is released there will be reasons for not upgrading, and reasons for not upgrading. Some will say the changes and added "gimmicks" don't make it worthwhile, and for them they will probably be right. I might well be among those, but if there is a new feature I can be convinced is useful, I might just upgrade.
--
Regards,

Savageduck
I tried the trial version of 4 and 5 and didn't like them. Don't remember why.
Whatever works for you and you have the extra money for. I guess I feel it's still up to the person using it, and the photos used with it, not the cost and gimmicks. Not to say I wouldn't have a better DSLR if I had money I didn't need for something else. LOL
#8
@John Passaneau
2011-10-12 23:08:44
On 10/12/2011 6:25 PM, Carrie wrote:
"Savageduck"<savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
On 2011-10-12 06:33:57 -0700, "Carrie" said:

"Ulysses" wrote in message
"Savageduck"<savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
It seems this "Removal of blur" filter could possibly be included in a future Photoshop release.
< http://gizmodo.com/5848371/photoshop-will-end-blurry-pics-fo rever>
--
Regards,

Savageduck
smart sharpen in Photoshop seems to work OK for me
what would be the difference ?

It works for me, too. They just need more gimmicks to get people to keep
buying newer versions.
I have CS3 that works for me and does everything I want and I don't see
needing anything more (at least at this point)

There is certainly nothing wrong with continuing to use any of the earlier versions of Photoshop if they meet your needs, and it seems CS3 is more than enough for you to deal will.

I have skipped different versions because I could not see a need to make a change. However, the additions to CS5 go far beyond "gimmick". So my upgrade path has been PS7, to CS2, to CS4, to CS5.
For me content aware fill& healing, the improved selection tools, the new ACR RAW engine (which I know isn't important to you) and the new version of Bridge have been worth the price of admission.

...and when CS6 is released there will be reasons for not upgrading, and reasons for not upgrading. Some will say the changes and added "gimmicks" don't make it worthwhile, and for them they will probably be right. I might well be among those, but if there is a new feature I can be convinced is useful, I might just upgrade.
--
Regards,

Savageduck
I tried the trial version of 4 and 5 and didn't like them. Don't remember why.
Whatever works for you and you have the extra money for. I guess I feel it's still up to the person using it, and the photos used with it, not the cost and gimmicks. Not to say I wouldn't have a better DSLR if I had money I didn't need for something else. LOL

Remember to upgrade every three years or so, or when you do find a reason to upgrade you will pay the full price all over again.

Myself I find the cost of upgrading worth it.

John P
#9
@John J Stafford
2011-10-14 00:00:12
That's another reason for me to continue to shoot properly in the first place - on film from MF to 8x10"

Digital creeps be damned.
#10
@Savageduck
2011-10-14 01:48:43
On 2011-10-13 17:00:12 -0700, John J Stafford said:

That's another reason for me to continue to shoot properly in the first place - on film from MF to 8x10"

Digital creeps be damned.

So you don't use digital or Photoshop?

--
Regards,

Savageduck
#11
@John J Stafford
2011-10-20 15:00:42
In article ,
John J Stafford wrote:

That's another reason for me to continue to shoot properly in the first place - on film from MF to 8x10"

Digital creeps be damned.

Uh...well... Since then I got a Leica M9. Sure makes a liar out of me, eh? It's a great camera. I modified a Canon 50mm f/.95 and after a lot of work - it actually works very, very well on the M9!
#12
@John J Stafford
2011-10-20 15:02:05
In article ,
Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

On 2011-10-13 17:00:12 -0700, John J Stafford said:

That's another reason for me to continue to shoot properly in the first place - on film from MF to 8x10"

Digital creeps be damned.

So you don't use digital or Photoshop?

I do now! Once I resolved the differences in my mind, I definitely have a place in my work for some digital. But that MF and LF - whew - lovely.
#13
@me
2011-10-24 07:54:18
smart sharpen in Photoshop seems to work OK for me
what would be the difference ?

...and that is just fine, but no amount of sharpening, smart sharpening and/or application of USM, is going to reduce the effect of motion blur. I suspect the astronomic photography world would welcome this, and some shots of crowd scenes could benefit
This concept uses a different algorithm and computer power to remove motion blur without introducing sharpening artifacts.
This is not as some would think, a solution for fixing out of focus images. Take another look at the presentation and listen to what is being said.

The last demo using the blurry photograph seemed designed to lead one to believe the technology could be used to fix out of focus issues.
#14
@Savageduck
2011-10-26 01:55:19
On 2011-10-25 16:27:06 -0700, "Kele" said:

Nik Sharpener Pro 3 has a "Focus" slider that is amazing.

Nik Sharpener Pro 3 is a great tool, however it will not fix/remove motion blur as this proposed "Removal of Blur" promises, or even do what it implies, "focus" an out of focus image. Here is the version of the story in the Photoshop blog;
<
http://blogs.adobe.com/photoshopdotcom/2011/10/behind-all-th e-buzz-deblur-sneak-peek.html

Also using the Nik Sharperner Pro 3 "Structure" slider and brushing in the effect where needed can also help to give you a good result.

Sharpener Pro 3 is another tool which should be used with great restraint, or you will find the resulting final image over populated with unwanted sharpening artifacts. More is not always better. The same can be said for the over use of Topaz, which also introduces ugly artifacts, the existence of which many of the heavy users deny.

There are few plugins or filters which will save a truly out of focus, beyond redemption image, but the Nik tools, and I include Dfine 2, Viveza 2, Color Efex Pro 4, and Silver Efex Pro 2 in that tool kit, will give you a head start on polishing a rough piece into a shining gem.

--
Regards,

Savageduck
#16
@david johnson
2011-10-26 05:31:33
On Tue, 25 Oct 2011 18:55:19 -0700, Savageduck
<savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

On 2011-10-25 16:27:06 -0700, "Kele" said:

Nik Sharpener Pro 3 has a "Focus" slider that is amazing.

Nik Sharpener Pro 3 is a great tool, however it will not fix/remove motion blur as this proposed "Removal of Blur" promises, or even do what it implies, "focus" an out of focus image. Here is the version of the story in the Photoshop blog;
<
http://blogs.adobe.com/photoshopdotcom/2011/10/behind-all-th e-buzz-deblur-sneak-peek.html

Also using the Nik Sharperner Pro 3 "Structure" slider and brushing in the effect where needed can also help to give you a good result.
Sharpener Pro 3 is another tool which should be used with great restraint, or you will find the resulting final image over populated with unwanted sharpening artifacts. More is not always better. The same can be said for the over use of Topaz, which also introduces ugly artifacts, the existence of which many of the heavy users deny.
There are few plugins or filters which will save a truly out of focus, beyond redemption image, but the Nik tools, and I include Dfine 2, Viveza 2, Color Efex Pro 4, and Silver Efex Pro 2 in that tool kit, will give you a head start on polishing a rough piece into a shining gem.

anyone else try the superstition? i certainly didnt see it in it
#17
@Savageduck
2011-10-26 06:48:36
On 2011-10-25 22:31:33 -0700, david johnson said:

On Tue, 25 Oct 2011 18:55:19 -0700, Savageduck
<savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

On 2011-10-25 16:27:06 -0700, "Kele" said:

Nik Sharpener Pro 3 has a "Focus" slider that is amazing.

Nik Sharpener Pro 3 is a great tool, however it will not fix/remove motion blur as this proposed "Removal of Blur" promises, or even do what it implies, "focus" an out of focus image. Here is the version of the story in the Photoshop blog;
<
http://blogs.adobe.com/photoshopdotcom/2011/10/behind-all-th e-buzz-deblur-sneak-peek.html

Also
using the Nik Sharperner Pro 3 "Structure" slider and brushing in the effect where needed can also help to give you a good result.
Sharpener Pro 3 is another tool which should be used with great restraint, or you will find the resulting final image over populated with unwanted sharpening artifacts. More is not always better. The same can be said for the over use of Topaz, which also introduces ugly artifacts, the existence of which many of the heavy users deny.
There are few plugins or filters which will save a truly out of focus, beyond redemption image, but the Nik tools, and I include Dfine 2, Viveza 2, Color Efex Pro 4, and Silver Efex Pro 2 in that tool kit, will give you a head start on polishing a rough piece into a shining gem.

anyone else try the superstition? i certainly didnt see it in it

Superstition?

--
Regards,

Savageduck
#18
@Kele
2011-10-26 08:46:14
The uTube video wasn't too clear, but the comparison image on the blog link you provided is stunning. Yeah, that's not Nik savable. My camera has too many megapixels for its sensor so I post focus often... jus-a-lil.

"Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
On 2011-10-25 16:27:06 -0700, "Kele" said:

Nik Sharpener Pro 3 has a "Focus" slider that is amazing.

Nik Sharpener Pro 3 is a great tool, however it will not fix/remove motion blur as this proposed "Removal of Blur" promises, or even do what it implies, "focus" an out of focus image.
Here is the version of the story in the Photoshop blog;
<
http://blogs.adobe.com/photoshopdotcom/2011/10/behind-all-th e-buzz-deblur-sneak-peek.html

Also using the Nik Sharperner Pro 3 "Structure" slider and brushing in the effect where needed can also help to give you a good result.
Sharpener Pro 3 is another tool which should be used with great restraint, or you will find the resulting final image over populated with unwanted sharpening artifacts. More is not always better. The same can be said for the over use of Topaz, which also introduces ugly artifacts, the existence of which many of the heavy users deny.

There are few plugins or filters which will save a truly out of focus, beyond redemption image, but the Nik tools, and I include Dfine 2, Viveza 2, Color Efex Pro 4, and Silver Efex Pro 2 in that tool kit, will give you a head start on polishing a rough piece into a shining gem.

--
Regards,

Savageduck
#19
@Michael J Davis
2011-10-27 11:07:21
Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> was inspired to say
On 2011-10-25 16:27:06 -0700, "Kele" said:

Nik Sharpener Pro 3 has a "Focus" slider that is amazing.

Nik Sharpener Pro 3 is a great tool, however it will not fix/remove motion blur as this proposed "Removal of Blur" promises, or even do what it implies, "focus" an out of focus image. Here is the version of the story in the Photoshop blog;
< http://blogs.adobe.com/photoshopdotcom/2011/10/behind-all-th e-buzz- deblur-sneak-peek.html

Also using the Nik Sharperner Pro 3 "Structure" slider and brushing in the effect where needed can also help to give you a good result.
Sharpener Pro 3 is another tool which should be used with great restraint, or you will find the resulting final image over populated with unwanted sharpening artifacts. More is not always better. The same can be said for the over use of Topaz, which also introduces ugly artifacts, the existence of which many of the heavy users deny.
There are few plugins or filters which will save a truly out of focus, beyond redemption image, but the Nik tools, and I include Dfine 2, Viveza 2, Color Efex Pro 4, and Silver Efex Pro 2 in that tool kit, will give you a head start on polishing a rough piece into a shining gem.

I've been using 'Focus Magic' satisfactorily for a couple of years; but its movement blur correction assumes constant movement along a single axis. Where, as often, camera shake leads to a dwell-move-dwell effect then the result is a doubling of the image at both ends.

The new Adobe project seems to be able to analyse both compound movement, *and* intensity, and then deconvolute them. If it can do this *in practise* it's totally mind blowing!

Mike

--
Michael J Davis
<><
#20
← Back to all threads